Is morality about doing the “right” thing and, if so, why?
When we do the agreed upon decent things because we fear disciplinary consequences would it not be fake – for the sake of convenience?
However, if we do them because it seems appropriate for the benefit of society and the individual, would that be true morality?
Comments – or not if you don’t fear being “left out”

Is it ever appropriate to come to a conclusion on “insufficient data”?
What if action must be taken NOW? Then a secondary decision temporarily over rides the final conclusion which can only be formed properly with sufficient data and, with time and care in dealing with the data.
The secondary decision; whether to act what the incomplete data indicates when based on short notice to form a conclusion with that incomplete data.
What I ask myself, at the time, will it do more harm than good. Of course, when data is incomplete how can I know if the tentative conclusion will do more harm than good?
Then decide on a probability of what seems best and take the chance.
However; if there is time to gather (inductive logic) and to sift as one discards the irrelevant (deductive logic); then declaring insufficient data when there’s a need to gather more information.
Seems like, don’t put me on a pedestal because I know how to use humility as a strength by making sure – really really sure.

What’s one person’s medicine is another’s poison, or so a saying goes. As a matter of fact, a source word “pharmaco” is defined by the online Etymology Dictionary as a word-forming element meaning “drug, medicine,” also “poison,” from Latinized form of Greek pharmako-, comb. form of pharmakon “drug, poison”http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=pharmakon&searchmode=none
Recalls for me a time when I was visiting a village; on an island; where there were no medical facilities. If medical help was needed an ambulance would be dispatched to the ferry terminal that serviced the island – and would eventually get there.
I was a member of a group that was holding a pot luck dinner there so, I asked if any of the foods contained soy-derived ingredients and, was assured that there was no soy in anything which was there.
I commented that this was a good thing because I was extremely allergic and, that if I ate any soy my throat would swell up and someone would have to do and emergency tracheostomy or I would choke to death.
A number of people immediately warned me of a few foods there which I should not eat.
This seems to be a combination of stereotypical prejudice and of insufficient data. I represented a construction sub group and may have been pre-judged (hence prejudice) as being a macho meat lover who would shun soy as a substitute for meat.
The insufficient data could have been about not finding out why I didn’t want soy.
Social interactions, and the standards involved, sometimes have metaphorical “pot lucks” that use a “one size fits all”.
Fits all what?

Re-invent the wheel, or something as far back in human knowledge or as basic?
Why not?
Derision, without data, seems to be for those who don’t object to portraying themselves as jealous destroyers.
At least there will be mega quantities of validating data that will be readily available.

One thing that could be an inhibitor, in this form of learning, could be a “fear of comparison” which is sometimes given as a prime motivator for jealousy and envy. It seems (to me) that it is probably inspired by seeing oneself as “better or worse than” other people. These other people may know something which I don’t and; I may know other things than they don’t – collectively or individually. However, If I limit my data prior to making such an erroneous judgement then, I may see myself as only better and/or worse than while my egotism and low self esteem stretch my viewpoint into an (impractically) broader perspective. A handy saying here; “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery” but, is one imitating to impress, imitating to be inspired, imitating to memorize rather than to learn, imitating for some other low or high quality purpose. This could well lead to another saying; “Flattery will get you nowhere”; where flattery is the objective and not (as mentioned in the first quote) sincere and therefore a by-product. I have read that the Inuit people; formerly known by a foreign (to them) name – Eskimo; in their original culture taught strictly by example and that it was an unwritten, and usually unspoken, rule that younger people were not to be taught interactively. It appears that this worked so well for them; and perhaps in similar cultures. In cultures with such an extremely harsh environment, as the Inuit lived in, it was quite obvious that survival was very dependent on careful attention to detail – such as when observing the lessons that were actually the deeds being performed around the young people. Another harsh environment that encouraged learning by example (although my research hasn’t turned up much quantitative data on the significance of this learning in the culture in that environment) is the N’de or Apache (given as an opposing culture’s word for enemy that the N’de were said to cherish for the respectful fear it showed) who’s territory tended to include much more desert than most North American First Nations, thus creating a greater attention for detail due to survival of the fittest. Mangus Colorado; who was a great Chief among the N’de a generation prior to the, better known, Cochise and Geronimo; was reported to use what science terms “thought experiments” so well that it almost always needed no subjective testing before application. Indeed, the entire culture was said to rank this as a virtue to be strived for. Many (most, all?) cultures moved toward a less punishing and, therefore, inspiring environment as they progressed and so; progressively lost some of the ability to discern which applications of attention to detail were about sufficient data and which were merely confusing. Perhaps the term, “Too much information” is sometimes used constructively in encouraging the learner to use their initiative to have sufficient data (as opposed to letting distorted egotism take them away from the truth by introducing confusing side issues) and; is sometimes used to supress the sufficiency of data by those who may have a motive inspired by fear of comparison. In closing, the references to data lead me to an opinion which I have formed about humility, and which I will present as “Food for thought”. Humility is sometimes referred to as a virtue and occasionally this is disputed. I think that the scientific term “Insufficient Data” is an excellent example of humility as a great strength. In short, admitting that I don’t know whatever it is that I don’t know and acknowledging when a process is not yet complete thus … cutting a lot of metaphorical bull defecant out of my life.

There’s an old saying that; if I were to point the finger (usually of negativity) toward some one else then, I would have four pointing back to me.

Leaves me wondering if, when I criticize another person, I am really dodging looking at the same thing in myself. Sort of telling every one (including myself) to “Look over there, that’s where the problem is. Don’t look for the same thing in me.” Part of my motivation may be to try to keep the third parties from seeing the same (supposed) problem within myself and, to quiet the voice of emotional healing which is trying to get me to resolve the problem, partially by trying to convince those third parties to validate my retreat in fear from facing the emotional pain that caused the problem to suppressed in the first place.

Another part of the motivation (probably much, much lesser) could be to defend against some manipulator who uses head games. This, I suppose, would likely include the first motivation as part of its source.

Then: when I’m in this mode and see someone do-ing something relating to the old emotional better than what I can, or taking it to a higher level than I know; instead of being inspired I would likely attack it with distortions; such as, but not limited to, “So, you think that you know better than me, eh?” Even if both of us has virtues and abilities which the other doesn’t and should be sharing with mutual respect.